home

State of the Union: Will Biden Resonate?

Americans have been dealt a hand with two candidates, neither of whom they particularly think should be President. Nonetheless, barring Trump being criminally tried, convicted and imprisoned before November, which has become more and more unlikely the past few months, Americans will have to choose between them.

So there's a lot riding on Joe Biden's speech tonight. I have not seen the draft, but I suspect like almost everything he does, he will land in the center, disappointing those with firm convictions at either extreme.

He's not going to come out against the death penalty, in favor of removing border walls or cutting back on prisons or cessation of jailing non-violent offenders, or even for federal legalization of marijuana. If he supports lowering pot from a Schedule I substance to a Schedule 3 substance, he is still missing the point. Marijuana should be removed from the controlled substance list entirely. Now that would be progress. [More....]

He may talk about diabetes drugs. But what about the other life-saving and life-prolonging drugs with ridiculous prices that Government insurance programs like Medicare (and private insurance) don't cover? Heart disease (not drug overdoses) is still the leading cause of death in this country.

Obesity (with or without type 2 diabetes) is a strong indicator for risk of serious heart disease, but new drugs that treat obesity are out of reach of millions because of the $1,000. a month price tag. I'm glad that Oprah can afford it, but what about everybody else? What help will Biden promise for the poor?

He's going to go after the portions of voters he can count on and those he thinks he can win over: He'll be strong on Roe v. Wade for women. He'll say we need to continue supporting the Ukraine. He will remind Israel he supports Palestine becoming a state. He'll support labor. He'll have statistics that will differ wildly from Trump's.

If he talks about the economic progress we've made since COVID-19, and says jobs are up and inflation is falling and all is right with the world, I think the Secret Service should take him shopping at a supermarket. That just is not true and we all know it. The prices for groceries and household products have soared. And show no sign of stopping.

In the end, none of it matters because there will be no change. As María in Joan Didion's Play It As It Lays would say, "Nothing applies".

What does matter: Biden is poised and has the demeanor of a statesman rather than a carnival barker. He can continue to restore the international respect we lost during Trump's last foray. Biden can work with an opposition Congress, he did it for decades. Biden honestly believes the country needs his ideas and that he has a job to finish. Given the alternative, I think he should have the chance.

Since none of the issues I most care about are on tonight's agenda, and Donald Trump is too batsh*t crazy to take seriously, I'm not sure I'll have strong opinions on tonight's speech.

For Biden's sake, and America's, I hope it goes well.

If you are watching the speech, here's a place to discuss it.
< Trump Plays the Nepo Card Again
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    None of the items (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Mar 07, 2024 at 08:12:47 PM EST
    you mention in your first five paragraphs are on anyone's radar for this election. Zero. Nada. So you are correct, none those will be addressed.

    It's the border, border, border. What he needs to hammer home is that that the GQP rejected a bill that offered some solutions. At the orange mob boss's direction. Rinse, repeat.

    And abortion and women's healthcare. Rinse, repeat.

    I believe the campaign has begun (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 07, 2024 at 08:41:39 PM EST
    If you are not watching you should be.  Joe is on fire.

    How many four letter words (none / 0) (#3)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Mar 07, 2024 at 09:12:43 PM EST
    are in the English language that can describe MTG?

    Parent
    This was really pretty great (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 07, 2024 at 09:19:14 PM EST
    He handed the hecklers their azz.  Mike looks constipated.  This is being well received.

    Parent
    Ah (none / 0) (#6)
    by coast on Thu Mar 07, 2024 at 09:31:44 PM EST
    Not enough!

    Parent
    Off topic. But on the subject of speeches (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Mar 07, 2024 at 09:43:20 PM EST
    I saw JB Pritzker's commencement speech at Northwestern. I like this guy. I would like to see him on the national stage.

    Biden Nailed It (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by john horse on Fri Mar 08, 2024 at 07:35:56 AM EST
    On issue after issue I thought Biden nailed it, contrasting what he has done or proposes to do with his predecessor (also known as He Who Cannot Be Named).

    Biden also addressed the age issue.  For over an hour, he gave a vigorous speech in which he was clearly in command.  

    Katie Britt (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 08, 2024 at 09:27:46 AM EST
    When is the GOP going to learn that conservative southern women should be nowhere near the podium? Last year we had Sarah Huckabee, Aunt Lydia, and this year we had Katie Britt, the commander's wife Serena, giving the rebuttal in the kitchen no less. Who says life doesn't imitate art?

    That was (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 08, 2024 at 10:16:25 AM EST
    a disaster.

    Parent
    Appeared as if (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 08, 2024 at 12:10:38 PM EST
    an aspiring middle school dramatist.  The cameras did not permit a full view so I am not sure if she was bare-foot and pregnant, but she was holed up in the kitchen-- like a good Republican woman. She did make Bobby Jindal's response of the past seem like a real barnburner.  And, we now thirst for an encore of Little Marco's Polaris Hills spellbinder.

    Parent
    Katie Britt (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Chuck0 on Sat Mar 09, 2024 at 06:38:50 PM EST
    is a fraud. The trafficking story she told happened 20 years ago in Mexico.

    Parent
    The only person happy with that performance (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Mar 09, 2024 at 07:32:59 PM EST
    is Bobby Jindal.  He is no longer the worst ever.

    Parent
    I know (none / 0) (#20)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Mar 10, 2024 at 06:57:30 AM EST
    and it was beyond disgusting.

    Parent
    Breathless in the Kitchen (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by KeysDan on Sun Mar 10, 2024 at 04:02:26 PM EST
    Scarlet Johansson's SNL parody of Britt was funny, but she did not quite get the Fundy Christian Little Girl voice of the Kitchen Lady.  

    Parent
    Now the (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Mar 11, 2024 at 08:43:51 AM EST
    actual sex trafficking victim who is an anti sex trafficking activist has spoken out and is ticked at Britt. She said she never spoke to Britt directly and only was on a panel where she discussed her sex trafficking and apparently she wasn't trafficked by a cartel either.

    This is nothing but a rolling disaster for the GOP.

    Parent

    The SOTU (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 08, 2024 at 09:52:49 AM EST
    was, fundamentally, a clarion call  to the dangers the nation faces from the Republican Party.  The unique circumstance of the sitting president facing off with a former president.permitted a comparison of the achievements of the present administration with the previous one --and, his "predecessor".,  And, critically  the Biden  vision of  progress and hope contrasted with  the Trump  outlook for a. dark Orban- like descent into autocracy fueled by chaos, retribution, resentment and hatred of. fellow Americans.

    The  President's delivery was spirited, full of energy, enthusiasm and determination.  He brought  an historic context  to his remarks, from the  dangers cited by Franklin Roosevelt in 1941, to  his own biography of being  Vice President to the first Black President and, now, being President to the first woman Vice President.  

    He deftly and humorously addressed his age-- from once being considered to be too young--elected to the senate at age 29 and being told he could not use the senate elevator, to, now, being told he is too old.   The SOTU showed vigor and vibrancy so much so that Trump couldn't believe it, claiming (projecting?) that he was on drugs.

    And most importantly (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 08, 2024 at 10:07:56 AM EST
    for the pearl clutches and bed wetters, he should be could absolutely kick republicans in the b@lls for 90 minutes and have fun doing it.

    The rights response has been hilarious.

    Too loud.  Too mean.  He talked too fast.  Too partisan.  Boohoo we are triggered.

    Get used to it.

    Parent

    Peter Baker (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 08, 2024 at 12:13:59 PM EST
    found it to be "rancorous".  Either he doesn't own a dictionary or he missed the address and was briefed by Marge.

    Parent
    Yeah, Joe Biden called out ... (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Mar 08, 2024 at 02:15:56 PM EST
    ... the Supreme Court, his "predecessor," MAGA Republicans for doing things that are unpopular with Americans. So, of course, this is why that's bad for Biden.

    Peter Baker makes my head hurt.

    Parent

    Yes, (5.00 / 5) (#17)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 08, 2024 at 05:53:37 PM EST
    Alito and Thomas were not there.  Clarence finally recused himself from something.

    Parent
    People kept saying (none / 0) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 07, 2024 at 09:21:04 PM EST
    why isn't Biden doing interviews or whatever to stop all the talk about his diminishment.

    This is why.

    From a Republican (none / 0) (#7)
    by coast on Thu Mar 07, 2024 at 09:40:46 PM EST
    I thought he performed well.  Of course I have issues with many of his policies, but he was forceful and whipped up his party.

    Thanks to Ken Buck (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 12, 2024 at 07:21:58 PM EST
    they now have a two vote majority!

    Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) said he "will resign from Congress later this month rather than serve out the remainder of his term through 2024," Axios reports.

    Washington Post: "Once Buck departs, Republicans will outnumber Democrats 218 to 213 in the House. That means Republicans can afford to lose only two votes to pass legislation along party lines when everyone is attending and voting."

    And this-

    Aaron Rodgers and Jesse Ventura Top RFK Jr.'s Short List
    March 12, 2024 at 5:42 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 436 Comments

    "Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has recently approached the N.F.L. quarterback Aaron Rodgers and the former Minnesota governor and professional wrestler Jesse Ventura about serving as his running mate on an independent presidential ticket, and both have welcomed the overtures," the Washington Post reports.

    "Mr. Kennedy confirmed on Tuesday that the two men were at the top of his list

    Jesse Ventura please.  It's time for a Do-rag VP.

    Buck (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 08:04:05 AM EST
    resigning puts Boebert in a quandary. She can run in the special election and if she wins she has to resign her current seat leaving it open. She already said she is running in that district in November but I would think it's unlikely she would win the seat against the winner of the special election. What a mess.

    Parent
    All of which (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 08:06:38 AM EST
    Buck knew very well.  This was a stunning move.  

    He didn't even tell Mikey.

    Parent

    I am (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 10:19:27 AM EST
    beginning to think that a lot of these guys hate Mikey but are too much of a coward to say so publicly.

    Parent
    Have you seen what Buck is saying (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 01:10:14 PM EST
    it's pretty public

    Parent
    Jesse Ventura has actually (none / 0) (#24)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Mar 12, 2024 at 09:14:13 PM EST
    Said some intelligent things in the past. I read one of his books (assuming there is more than one). Aaron Rodgers on the hand, is a complete nutball. Too many hits to the head maybe.

    Parent
    Gym Jordan and House Judiary Committe (none / 0) (#29)
    by KeysDan on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 01:31:40 PM EST
    goes off the rails. Once again. Their witness, former Special Counsel Robert Hur, became Has-Ben Hur--another sacrifice (Harvard, Stanford Law, Rehnquist Clerk) on the altar of Trump.

    Hur did not like calling President Biden "exonerated" which may be thought of as being cleared of an accusation or unlawful act, but he did refer, as he did through the hearing, to his report, that no criminal charges are warranted, and he declined to charge on the documents case.  More over, his judgment would be the same even if Biden was not the still g president.

    Hur indicated, as in the report, that the evidence did not establish wrongdoing.  And, not only was there a shortage of evidence, but also, ther may be innocent explanations

    The Democrats on the Committee did an excellent job of emphasizing the contrasts and comparisons with Trump's stolen document case and underscoring the partisan hit job of the report.

    Of course, there would not have been a hearing if it were not for the gratuitous commentary accompanying Hur's declination based on the lack of evidence and criminal intent. Hur lost credibility with the release that morning of the transcript of Biden's two-day deposition. The report on Biden:  `A sympathetic well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory."  Transcript and not in report: Hur; "you appear to have a photographic understanding and
    recall".  
    The report caused a political firestorm due to Hur stating in the report that Biden could not remember the date and month of his son's death. But, the transcript indicated that was a lie.  Biden: Romberg, in this time frame, my son is either deployed or dying. But, what month did Beau die?  Oh, God, May 30th." Someone in the room added, 2015.  Biden, yes,  2015.

    That was surreal (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 03:46:54 PM EST
    the republicans just lied and lied and said one ridiculous thing after another.

    It's true the democrats did a decent job of speaking the truth.  But everyone heard what they wanted to hear.

    The only expectation for a republican representative is to say the worst possible things about Biden.  They did their job.  I'm sure the folks at home were happy with it.

    Parent

    Of (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by FlJoe on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 04:46:50 PM EST
    course the media, after swallowing the original bogus report hook line and sinker, spent little time on it's debunking, or missed the point entirely.

    Parent
    yes, (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by KeysDan on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 05:05:49 PM EST
    The WaPo story disappeared.  NYTimes headline was "Hur says Biden not exonerated."  

    If you keep getting duped, you are just part of the shame.

    Parent

    Not (none / 0) (#34)
    by FlJoe on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 05:20:36 PM EST
    duped, more like mission accomplished.

    Parent
    How could (none / 0) (#33)
    by KeysDan on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 05:15:20 PM EST
    Merrick Garland have appointed Hur?  Were there no Democratic US Attorneys of integrity?  Guess, Democrats must have a Republican prosecutor, unlike
    Republicans.  It has been reported that Hur was coached for the House hearing by Trump operatives.

    The hearing did not turn out as the Republicans expected, and that alone was good. Maybe, the most effective result was for Democrats, putting the senile concerns to bed, for the likes of Ezra Klein and Jon Stewart.

    Parent

    It think it was definitely (none / 0) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 13, 2024 at 06:26:11 PM EST
    plus democrats.  They looked cartoonish.  If anyone persuadable was watching.  The right got hours of FOX and NESWSMAX segments.

    Shrug.  

    Yeah, about the prosecutors.  It's simple.  We get republican prosecutors because we will take it and like it.  

    I hope we stop taking it.  I'm not holding my breath.

    The consensus moving from Biden is feeble and senile to Biden is evil and mean and loud is good.  In a META way.

    It was hilarious watching those House fools accuse Biden of everything Trump promotes as his strengths

    Parent

    Democrats have an opportunity here. (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 02:43:38 AM EST
    In a battle of attrition, the numbers and financials already favor the Biden-Harris campaign and the DNC. But I'm of a mind that the GOP's nomination of Trump is a gift. So, I'd be aggressive and press them. Hard.

    Start spending big on ads now and define Trump early, because they don't have the funds to respond in kind and further, Trump's about to be tied up in criminal court in New York. Pound him. If he's convicted at trial, so much the better. Keep hitting him as a convicted felon, unfit for office.

    The goal here would be by the time of the Republican convention this summer, the race between Biden and Trump should be effectively over. The GOP has giftwrapped for us the most fundamentally flawed and thoroughly repulsive major-party presidential candidate we'll ever see in our lifetime. Because this isn't Donald Trump the Novelty Act in 2016 or President Trump the Incumbent in 2020. It's Fascist Trump the Felony Defendant in 2024, a now-known and genuinely despicable character and the Snidely Whiplash of our times.

    The GOP is also nearly broke and starting to fracture, and Republicans' knives are out for each other. For Democrats, Biden-Harris should be a victory lap in the fall, and the question then shifts to down-ballot contests and the length of the campaign's coattails.

    One very rarely gets an opportunity in presidential politics to win going away. And quite honestly, if you can't run up the score on a guy facing double-digit felony charges and over a half-billion dollars in legal judgments, fines and interest penalties, then you're really in the wrong game.

    The opening is there for Democrats to seize the moment. Don't just campaign on the demographic margins and play to not lose. Rather for once, play to win. Dream big and think landslide because for the country's long-term sake, the MAGA Republicans need to not just be rejected, but routed.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 07:51:35 AM EST
    I agree.  

    Parent
    Democrats Must Counter (none / 0) (#38)
    by RickyJim on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 12:33:48 PM EST
    the most common pro-Trump arguments:

    1. "I did better economically under Trump than I am doing under Biden".
    2. "Biden screwed up the southern border by rescinding Trump executive orders to prevent the flooding in of illegal immigrants".  
    3. "Kamala Harris will be taking over soon if Biden is reelected".
    4. "Biden is the one to be punished for allowing the genocide in Gaza to happen".

    The 2016 election is proof enough that simply pointing out Trump's character faults is insufficient to win.

    Parent
    This is (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by jmacWA on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 03:24:24 PM EST
    Delusional.  

    1."I did better economically under Trump than I am doing under Biden".

    >Maybe if you are in the 1%, most of us are not.

    2. "Biden screwed up the southern border by rescinding Trump executive orders to prevent the flooding in of illegal immigrants".  

    >Please list everything Republicans have done to ease the situation

    3. "Kamala Harris will be taking over soon if Biden is reelected".

    > If Biden isn't reelected TRUMP will be taking over... nuf said.

    4. "Biden is the one to be punished for allowing the genocide in Gaza to happen".

    > I am in no way happy with Biden's handling of Gaza, that you seem to think Trump would do better is unbelievable.

    Parent

    Pffft (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 03:32:12 PM EST
    Calling them Delusional isn't a Winning Strategy (none / 0) (#58)
    by RickyJim on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 08:29:20 PM EST
    It's (none / 0) (#65)
    by FlJoe on Sat Mar 16, 2024 at 01:37:26 PM EST
    funny how Republicans never have to "work" to spread  or defend their lies.

    Parent
    At this point, those people who ... (none / 0) (#66)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Mar 17, 2024 at 03:02:00 AM EST
    ... believe the border is broken and the economy was better under Trump are unlikely to be persuaded otherwise, even if I brought in an expert like David J. Bier of the Cato Institute to explain in detail to them how the Trump administration systematically undermined the U.S. immigration system and border security between 2017 and 2021.

    This is going to be a base election. I'm not here to beg for your vote by restating the already obvious. You're an adult, and if you can't figure things out at this point in order to make an existential choice between right and wrong, then the kind of help you need is well beyond my amateur standing.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Every one (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 03:26:02 PM EST
    a media created story.  I would just pont out he didn't have 91 felony charges in 2016.  

    There is no comparison to anything from 2016.  Trump was an unknown.  Not anymore.

    I keep saying this and no one listens.  2024 is going to be a great year for Democrats.

    I'm tired of explaining why.

    Remember where you heard that.


    Parent

    I have to disagree (none / 0) (#45)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 04:52:49 PM EST
    on the unknown part. I knew who he was 25 years ago.

    Parent
    Ha (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 05:23:16 PM EST
    Me too.  I lived in NYC all through the 80s.

    But you have to admit.  More is now known.

    I have always thought if we (Dems) could distill a message that made people understand what a threat the right was that is an election we could win.  

    We are about to get that election.  If I'm wrong I will eat me words but I don't believe the American voters will choose autocracy.

    And the autocracy is going to be clear to everyone by November.

    Another bright spot.   Money.  Biden is raising record amounts.  Trump is losing small money doners by the minute.  2-300,000 since last time.  And who the F is going to donate to him.

    This is important all the way down the ballot.  Trump takeover of the RNC means less money for anyone not named Trump.

    Parent

    In case you missed early Trump NYC (none / 0) (#47)
    by jmacWA on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 05:04:29 AM EST
    It's pretty easy to imagine what he was like.  According to Page 6 he was just like iDJiT JR is today.

    Parent
    The Republican primary (none / 0) (#42)
    by KeysDan on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 04:25:11 PM EST
    vote for Nikki Haley showed an electoral weakness and is dangerous for Trump.  Even if just a small percentage of Haley voters stay home, it is a Biden landslide.

    Trump handlers surely recognize the danger and are likely to argue for putting Haley on the ticket---Trump is transactional, and  is likely to go along despite calling  her a bird brain; and Haley is likely to go along despite  her calling him unfit for office.  And, her protestations to the contrary.

    I have a hard time (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 04:45:33 PM EST
    imagining him choosing a woman.  I know it's the no brainer thing to do.  And he clearly NEEDS to do it.  Oddly I think the fact he needs to will work against him actually doing it.

    I've been thinking of he chooses a woman VP it shows he is really scared.

    But you are right about her voters.  I think I heard she got 70,000 votes in GA.  When she wasn't even running anymore.

    Parent

    Republicans are talking to themselves (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 04:52:36 PM EST
    I really think the media bubble is going to bite them on the azz.  There is a Trump NEWSMAX interview from yesterday thas been making the rounds today.

    It's LOL if you are not a Trump supporter.  They really don't understand how ridiculous they sound.  Or they do understand and are just dishing it out.  Either way they are liveing in an alternate reality.

    A win for Fani Willis. (none / 0) (#48)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 04:39:45 PM EST
    Based on the facts and the law, Fulton county Superior Court  Judge Scott McAfee found no conflict of interest and  States Attorney Fani Willis was not disqualified from the election interference case.  Based on several subjective measures (not solely the romantic relationship with Special  Prosector Nathan Wade) the judge determined there was the appearance of impropriety--not of such to rise to the extreme and rare  disqualification, but sufficient to require the removal of Special Prosecutor Wade or the stepping aside of the States Attorney. (Note; Wade submitted his resigned Friday afternoon).

    The judge determined Ms. Willis to have had a tremendous lapse of judgment.

    However, according to the findings, the financial benefit to Ms.Willis ( the argument of the motion) netted the amount of about $100 from the pair's joint travels, essentially Dutch treats between  Ms Wills' cash reimbursements to Wade  and her direct payment of expenses.  This despite the judges gratuitous and unsubstantiated suspicions of the veracity of their  testimony.

    Moreover, it was noted that Wade was not the first person offered the position. Wade was offered the position after a former governor of Georgia turned it down. Moreover, the judge acknowledged that the hourly rate of $250 was at the lower end of rates for metro-Atlanta and that the hourly provision was not an incentive to prolong the trial.  Indeed, States Attorney Willis strive to move rapidly.

    The judge found that the motion affecting Trump and other criminal defendants attempting to overthrow the government was built on a brittle foundation that was not supported by the evidence. The criminal defendants changed focus from financial gain to when the former romantic relationship began.

    Trump, of course, is likely to appeal.  Easy to do having access to unlimited funds of supporters and the treasury of the RNC.  Hopefully. the rookie judge will let the trial begin with appeal after the trial, if necessary.

    People I thought were smart (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 05:08:46 PM EST
    are saying she should step aside.  I don't agree.  She has earned this. IMO.

    Parent
    She should (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 05:30:28 PM EST
    not step aside.  Under Georgia law if she refuses, the entire prosecutorial team is off the case and a new Prosector and team would need to be appointed.  This would likely take the case from this distraction and delay to, essentially, the dropping of the case.

      It should be underscored that no conflict of interest was found and there was no evidence of financial gain-- the original basis of the motion of the criminal defendants.  Appearances  of impropriety are not a basis for disqualification in  Georgia, although the judge seems to think it is  while admitting it  would be extreme  and rare .

    Fani Willis was elected by the voters of  Fulton County and is. accountable to them for "appearances".


    Parent

    Note (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 05:32:35 PM EST
     ...if she recuses

    Parent
    Justice (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by FlJoe on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 06:14:27 PM EST
    Thomas has done far. far worse, what a joke our so called justice system is and the media a pack of braying jackasses, chasing every morsel the right wing throws at  them.

    Parent
    I some would (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 06:50:56 PM EST
    say Ginni being involved in the overthrow of the government creates an "appearance of impropriety".

    Parent
    My impression is (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 06:53:47 PM EST
    she would have to be dragged off the case.

    Parent
    Fani (none / 0) (#55)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 07:41:43 PM EST
    will need to be strong and continue to fight.   Republicans  will be after her on several fronts--picking up on Judge McAfee's harsh and evidence-free  scolding.  

    Parent
    Yes, A Win for the Prosecution (none / 0) (#56)
    by RickyJim on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 08:17:02 PM EST
    Wade's replacement would have to be more qualified for the job than he was and so it would make it more likely for a trial to result in a conviction.

    Parent
    There's also the possibility that ... (5.00 / 3) (#67)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Mar 17, 2024 at 03:17:50 AM EST
    ... District Attorney Fani Willis decides to take direct control over the prosecution of Trump & Co. herself. From everything I've read about her, she's a formidable trial attorney. The defendants could well rue the day they made it personal. And quite frankly, this is one of those high-profile cases in which the DA should probably be the lead prosecutor in court.

    Parent
    On another front... (none / 0) (#57)
    by desertswine on Fri Mar 15, 2024 at 08:23:11 PM EST
    Peter Navarro is asking the Supreme Court to keep him out of prison.

    In an emergency application filed with the Supreme Court late Friday, Navarro's lawyers say his case marks "the first time in our nation's history" that "a senior presidential advisor has been convicted of contempt of Congress after asserting executive privilege over a congressional subpoena."

    I can't stand this guy.

    I guess (none / 0) (#59)
    by jmacWA on Sat Mar 16, 2024 at 05:03:06 AM EST
    Navarro is unaware of the other firsts, that IMO, affect his case.  

    Parent
    They will probably (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Mar 16, 2024 at 08:03:21 AM EST
    take the case.   And then delay it for a year or two.

    Parent
    I do not think so. What is before them (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Peter G on Sat Mar 16, 2024 at 11:12:48 AM EST
    is a motion to delay Navarro's surrender for service of sentence, pending the preparation, filing and disposition of an application for certiorari, after losing his appeal (and being denying a delay) in two lower courts. Last time I researched it (for a client), not a single such motion had been granted by any Justice of the Supreme Court in any case since their authority to consider such motions was established by statute in 1984 (or maybe it was 1986).

    Parent
    Stay of surrender denied today (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by Peter G on Mon Mar 18, 2024 at 07:02:08 PM EST
    by Chief Justice Roberts (as Circuit Justice for the D.C. Circuit, where the contempt-of-Congress case arose). (Someone here said it was Justice Thomas's jurisdiction, but it isn't/wasn't.) One-page opinion saying it appeared that Navarro's lawyers did not raise in the trial court the issues they claimed justified extending his bail pending certiorari, which creates a "forfeiture" of the issues. So he must begin serving his sentence on a date in the near future to be set by the sentencing judge.

    Parent
    It was (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Mar 16, 2024 at 11:25:09 AM EST
    a joke

    Parent
    I understood your comment (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Peter G on Sat Mar 16, 2024 at 12:35:07 PM EST
    was a (well-justified) cynical remark, but I did not take it as a joke.

    Parent
    Yes, (none / 0) (#61)
    by KeysDan on Sat Mar 16, 2024 at 11:05:31 AM EST
    and the Supreme Court Justice for the circuit is....wait for it......
                                  Clarence Thomas

    Parent
    But but but (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 18, 2024 at 11:53:13 AM EST
    you are a billionaire!?

    Trump can't post $464M bond to appeal New York fraud case, lawyers say

    The chickens are about to come home to roost.  A lot of F'ing chickens.

    Only the best chickens.

    Huuuuge Chickens! (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by coast on Mon Mar 18, 2024 at 12:28:04 PM EST
    Remember, a bond is not required (none / 0) (#70)
    by Peter G on Mon Mar 18, 2024 at 12:54:29 PM EST
    in order to appeal. It is only required in order to appeal without the winning party having the power to collect the judgment even during the ongoing appeal process. If the AG's office wants to risk collection during the appeal, understanding they will have to repay him if he prevails, that's up to them. The party that lost at trial is not entitled to a stay just because they choose to appeal in a civil case any more than a losing criminal defendant gets to avoid or postpone serving their sentence by exercising their right of appeal. The point of the bond is to ensure that the party who prevailed at trial will be able to collect on that judgment later, if the appeal fails, as most appeals do.

    Parent
    I saw Letitia mention 40Wall St (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 18, 2024 at 05:36:23 PM EST
    and found this on wiki

    The loan on the property was transferred to a special servicer that November because there was a possibility that the state government's ongoing civil investigation of the Trump Organization could result in the organization's dissolution.[279] Following a January 2024 ruling in which the Trump Organization was found liable for civil fraud, New York Attorney General Letitia James said her office was prepared to seize the building if he could not pay a judgment of approximately $355 million.



    Parent
    I Still Don't Understand Insurrection (none / 0) (#71)
    by RickyJim on Mon Mar 18, 2024 at 05:16:41 PM EST
    There is at least one federal statute and one constitutional provision relating to it:
    18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection
    U.S. Code

    Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

    Fourteenth Amendment  Equal Protection and Other Rights

    Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office
    No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.


    I can't fathom why all the discussion and legal proceedings as to regards to Trump is based on the amendment and not on the statute.  If anything, the applicability to Trump's behavior on and before Jan. 6, 2021 is made more explicit by the statute.  No quibbling about oaths taken is necessary.  It is also enforceable in Federal Court and a conviction yields disqualification as a bonus. I don't see why it should be harder to get a conviction on the basis of 2383 than the other charges on which Trump has been indicted. Is it simply a case of incompetence on the part of Jack Smith and Merrick Garland?

    No, it is not a "case of incompetence" (none / 0) (#74)
    by Peter G on Mon Mar 18, 2024 at 07:17:03 PM EST
    by anyone. The term "insurrection" is not defined in either the criminal statute or the constitutional disqualification provision. Both use the same phrase, "insurrection or rebellion." I therefore don't see how either of them can be described as "more explicit." A criminal conviction, however, requires elaborate and time-consuming procedures, and ultimately proof beyond a reasonable doubt. No sensible person (until the Supreme Court rendered its shocking and incomprehensible opinion) would have thought the constitutional provision was harder to enforce.